Hi there, I'm new to Eclipse. I'm looking at it from a Windows open
source development standpoint. I see it as possibly a good way to
convert Windows developers oriented towards Visual Studio to bigger and
better things. Where in my case, this means High Level Languages such
as Scheme or Lisp or OCaml or whatnot.

I have a turbulent history in a couple of open source communities.
Let's just say I don't run with the Python or OCaml crowds anymore. I
could not help but read up a lot on your Ilias debacle. I myself am
frequently accused of being a troll. I'm happy to say I'm not remotely
in Ilias' league. Also, the environment of Usenet is not reasoned or
considered like it is here, judging from archives of how Ilias was
handled. On Usenet, I frequently use the following sig:

"Troll" - (n.) Anything you don't like.
Usage: "He's just a troll."

I have a tremendous intellectual antipathy towards the Troll label. My
jury is out on whether I would label Ilias a troll. If I had the
stamina, or misfortune, to read many more posts of his, even I might
choose the label. Or I might not.

I do think there's a far easier label to apply, however. One with less
"groupthink and cat calling" about it. Although admittedly, some may
see it only as a matter of semantics and definitions. Anyways, I'd say
Ilias is a "wholly unworkable person." If I understood the archives
correctly, it seems: he does not offer any practical solutions to any
problems. He does not personally volunteer his energy to deal with the
issues. It's all throwing rocks and no answers. All heat and no light.

I don't think open source groups need supercharged critics if that's
their only claim to fame. I myself could tolerate a supercharged
critic, throwing hundreds of rocks, so long as they solved *ONE* of an
open source community's outstanding problems. At least then there is
real work gained from "the disruptive guy." Some would call it
disruption, others would call it being kept honest. But real work
gained would justify some community pain.

How does this compare to my own standards of behavior, which have caused
various parties to label me as 'trollish' ? Well, I've made many people
mad. But I've always tried to apply my energy to solutions. As groups,
people may not be able to work with each other. In particular, note the
following mangerial theory:

Ilias and I are both of this Shaper archetype. Note that Shapers are
pretty useless when a process is already in place.

What is the point of my post? It is merely for your contemplation,
since I've invested 3 hours this evening reading through your archives.
The very 1st impression I got of your newsgroups was defined by Ilias.
I don't know if any of you have had cause to think about these issues
since his banning. I do hope that in the future, you consider the
slippery slope upon which the Troll label and bannings rest. I think
the slope is less slippery when heat and vitriol is measured against
milestones achieved. Or even sincere *attempts* to achieve milestones,
even when in the final analysis, no one delivers the goods.

I am not aware of why he was officially banned if that is the case. He
was someone with lots of ideas and energy. He didn't bother me much. I
never found him to be a troll. He seemed to be some form of spammer.
Perhaps a slow but steady spammer :P

While his statements were slow and steady, he did expect fast response.
That was probably his biggest problem. A guy like that should be let
loose once per year. He would make a good CMM inspector :P

This community has a more positive attitude than some. I think its
because of its size. You will find some people that give quick flippant
responses, but along side you will find 3-4 quality responses from
people anxious to help that drown out those whose time is too valueable
to be bothered. Even if you ask a stupid question.

I rear my head with complaints about the license a few times a month.
Nobody has called me a troll yet.

CL

Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
> Hi there, I'm new to Eclipse. I'm looking at it from a Windows open
> source development standpoint. I see it as possibly a good way to
> convert Windows developers oriented towards Visual Studio to bigger and
> better things. Where in my case, this means High Level Languages such
> as Scheme or Lisp or OCaml or whatnot.
>
> I have a turbulent history in a couple of open source communities. Let's
> just say I don't run with the Python or OCaml crowds anymore. I could
> not help but read up a lot on your Ilias debacle. I myself am
> frequently accused of being a troll. I'm happy to say I'm not remotely
> in Ilias' league. Also, the environment of Usenet is not reasoned or
> considered like it is here, judging from archives of how Ilias was
> handled. On Usenet, I frequently use the following sig:
>
> "Troll" - (n.) Anything you don't like.
> Usage: "He's just a troll."
>
> I have a tremendous intellectual antipathy towards the Troll label. My
> jury is out on whether I would label Ilias a troll. If I had the
> stamina, or misfortune, to read many more posts of his, even I might
> choose the label. Or I might not.
>
> I do think there's a far easier label to apply, however. One with less
> "groupthink and cat calling" about it. Although admittedly, some may
> see it only as a matter of semantics and definitions. Anyways, I'd say
> Ilias is a "wholly unworkable person." If I understood the archives
> correctly, it seems: he does not offer any practical solutions to any
> problems. He does not personally volunteer his energy to deal with the
> issues. It's all throwing rocks and no answers. All heat and no light.
>
> I don't think open source groups need supercharged critics if that's
> their only claim to fame. I myself could tolerate a supercharged
> critic, throwing hundreds of rocks, so long as they solved *ONE* of an
> open source community's outstanding problems. At least then there is
> real work gained from "the disruptive guy." Some would call it
> disruption, others would call it being kept honest. But real work
> gained would justify some community pain.
>
> How does this compare to my own standards of behavior, which have caused
> various parties to label me as 'trollish' ? Well, I've made many people
> mad. But I've always tried to apply my energy to solutions. As groups,
> people may not be able to work with each other. In particular, note the
> following mangerial theory:
>
> http://www.teams.org.uk/shaper.htm
>
> Ilias and I are both of this Shaper archetype. Note that Shapers are
> pretty useless when a process is already in place.
>
> What is the point of my post? It is merely for your contemplation,
> since I've invested 3 hours this evening reading through your archives.
> The very 1st impression I got of your newsgroups was defined by Ilias.
> I don't know if any of you have had cause to think about these issues
> since his banning. I do hope that in the future, you consider the
> slippery slope upon which the Troll label and bannings rest. I think
> the slope is less slippery when heat and vitriol is measured against
> milestones achieved. Or even sincere *attempts* to achieve milestones,
> even when in the final analysis, no one delivers the goods.
>

I agree with CL. I think the Eclipse community is very tolerant of
criticism. AFAIK, Ilias is the only person who has ever been called a troll
around here.

In the end, I did ban Ilias. And upon reflection, I think that Brandon's
insight is bang-on. Ilias was more smoke than fire....he really only called
me names a few times. But his ideas were very impractical. And I found his
approach of slamming Eclipse on the newsgroups and then asking me privately
for a job to fix the issues he had identified to be quite distasteful.

But in fact, it was not his behaviour on the newsgroups that caused his
banishment at all. It was his behaviour on Bugzilla that made me ask him to
leave. It is one thing to waste my time (and others!) on the newsgroups. But
getting into a spiral of vitriol and bug open/close/reopen/close/reopen/...
with the committers is a whole other world of hurt that required some sort
of resolution.

And FWIW, I made very sure that when I made the decision to banish him that
it was made in neither haste nor anger. I completely agree that these sorts
of actions should only be done as a last resort.

"CL [dnoyeb] Gilbert" <Lamont_Gilbert@rigidsoftware.com> wrote in message
news:d42u8f$trc$1@news.eclipse.org...
>I am not aware of why he was officially banned if that is the case. He was
>someone with lots of ideas and energy. He didn't bother me much. I never
>found him to be a troll. He seemed to be some form of spammer. Perhaps a
>slow but steady spammer :P
>
> While his statements were slow and steady, he did expect fast response.
> That was probably his biggest problem. A guy like that should be let
> loose once per year. He would make a good CMM inspector :P
>
> This community has a more positive attitude than some. I think its
> because of its size. You will find some people that give quick flippant
> responses, but along side you will find 3-4 quality responses from people
> anxious to help that drown out those whose time is too valueable to be
> bothered. Even if you ask a stupid question.
>
> I rear my head with complaints about the license a few times a month.
> Nobody has called me a troll yet.
>
> CL
>
>
> Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
>> Hi there, I'm new to Eclipse. I'm looking at it from a Windows open
>> source development standpoint. I see it as possibly a good way to
>> convert Windows developers oriented towards Visual Studio to bigger and
>> better things. Where in my case, this means High Level Languages such as
>> Scheme or Lisp or OCaml or whatnot.
>>
>> I have a turbulent history in a couple of open source communities. Let's
>> just say I don't run with the Python or OCaml crowds anymore. I could
>> not help but read up a lot on your Ilias debacle. I myself am frequently
>> accused of being a troll. I'm happy to say I'm not remotely in Ilias'
>> league. Also, the environment of Usenet is not reasoned or considered
>> like it is here, judging from archives of how Ilias was handled. On
>> Usenet, I frequently use the following sig:
>>
>> "Troll" - (n.) Anything you don't like.
>> Usage: "He's just a troll."
>>
>> I have a tremendous intellectual antipathy towards the Troll label. My
>> jury is out on whether I would label Ilias a troll. If I had the
>> stamina, or misfortune, to read many more posts of his, even I might
>> choose the label. Or I might not.
>>
>> I do think there's a far easier label to apply, however. One with less
>> "groupthink and cat calling" about it. Although admittedly, some may see
>> it only as a matter of semantics and definitions. Anyways, I'd say Ilias
>> is a "wholly unworkable person." If I understood the archives correctly,
>> it seems: he does not offer any practical solutions to any problems. He
>> does not personally volunteer his energy to deal with the issues. It's
>> all throwing rocks and no answers. All heat and no light.
>>
>> I don't think open source groups need supercharged critics if that's
>> their only claim to fame. I myself could tolerate a supercharged critic,
>> throwing hundreds of rocks, so long as they solved *ONE* of an open
>> source community's outstanding problems. At least then there is real
>> work gained from "the disruptive guy." Some would call it disruption,
>> others would call it being kept honest. But real work gained would
>> justify some community pain.
>>
>> How does this compare to my own standards of behavior, which have caused
>> various parties to label me as 'trollish' ? Well, I've made many people
>> mad. But I've always tried to apply my energy to solutions. As groups,
>> people may not be able to work with each other. In particular, note the
>> following mangerial theory:
>>
>> http://www.teams.org.uk/shaper.htm
>>
>> Ilias and I are both of this Shaper archetype. Note that Shapers are
>> pretty useless when a process is already in place.
>>
>> What is the point of my post? It is merely for your contemplation, since
>> I've invested 3 hours this evening reading through your archives. The
>> very 1st impression I got of your newsgroups was defined by Ilias. I
>> don't know if any of you have had cause to think about these issues since
>> his banning. I do hope that in the future, you consider the slippery
>> slope upon which the Troll label and bannings rest. I think the slope is
>> less slippery when heat and vitriol is measured against milestones
>> achieved. Or even sincere *attempts* to achieve milestones, even when in
>> the final analysis, no one delivers the goods.
>>